Denominations which allow Women Pastors.

[PRmerger]

I have seen you seem in many of your posts to like to stay with your theme of compilation of the Bible.

Yes. It is a slam-dunk as far as a multitude of objections that are often posed here.

But that was many centuries ago and long before the Reformation and as a Protestant once told me.

Not sure of the relevance of this comment.

Point is: you still do believe what someone else is telling you.

You know that the Gospel of Mark is theopneustos for NO OTHER REASON, except that SOMEONE ELSE TOLD YOU so.

God can use who He wants at any given time for His purposes.

Yes. And He did so using Catholic men. Catholic bishops to be exact.

And each and every time you, or any Protestant, quotes from the NT you are giving tacit submission to the authority of the CC.

And you are giving tacit approval to the dogma of infallibility.

So unless you want to say that the Church erred somewhere in her discernment of the 27 book canon of the NT, you must acknowledge that you believe she was infallible.

And that you submit to her authority.

And that you are not a Bible Alone advocate (you can use this on your Bible Alone friends, Sy.)

As to your seemingly obsession with Phelps, I believe he will have to answer to God just like all the rest of us will. I’ll leave his fate in God’s hands.

Yes, he is a rather convenient refutation for a multitude of objections to Catholicism–the most common one he smashes to bits is the one that is oft professed here, “Why is the CC such a big meanie in professing that you have to believe certain things? Why can’t people just read the Bible and ‘think for themselves’?”

Answer: Fred Phelps.

That’s why.

That usually is enough to end any discussion for there is no way to refute it when one sees the vile message of some people who read the Bible and wants to “think for themselves.”

 

[steido01]

JonC’s point is not entirely correct, grammatically. It is true that in most english translations, Confessio Augustana XIV states that “no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly called” (here in the translation found at bookofconcord.org). But the pronoun is not there in either the Latin or German text.

Thank you for the information. Out of curiosity, do you know whether the grammatical point in English would still hold in the Greek translations that were brought to Patriarch Jeremiah II?

 

[Sy_Noe]

Yes. It is a slam-dunk as far as a multitude of objections that are often posed here.

Not sure of the relevance of this comment.

Point is: you still do believe what someone else is telling you.

You know that the Gospel of Mark is theopneustos for NO OTHER REASON, except that SOMEONE ELSE TOLD YOU so.

Yes. And He did so using Catholic men. Catholic bishops to be exact.

And each and every time you, or any Protestant, quotes from the NT you are giving tacit submission to the authority of the CC.

And you are giving tacit approval to the dogma of infallibility.

So unless you want to say that the Church erred somewhere in her discernment of the 27 book canon of the NT, you must acknowledge that you believe she was infallible.

And that you submit to her authority.

And that you are not a Bible Alone advocate (you can use this on your Bible Alone friends, Sy.)

Sigh. The relevance is it’s not to every believer as much of a slam-dunk as you seem to believe it is. Irregardless as to whether she was infallible on compiling books centuries and centuries and centuries ago.

 

[whoisdiss]

I know most Anglicans allow women to be ordained as Pastors. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America allows women to be ordained. The Presbyterian Church in America to my knowledge allows is. The Eastern Orthodox church does not allow women to be ordained Pastors, but they do allow them to become Deacons.

---

God bless.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I know most Anglicans allow women to be ordained as Pastors. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America allows women to be ordained. The Presbyterian Church in America to my knowledge allows is. The Eastern Orthodox church does not allow women to be ordained Pastors, but they do allow them to become Deacons.

---

God bless.

Yes so many do today. Just to add a few more to your list so does the United Church of Christ, the United Methodists, and Disciples of Christ. There well may be others. The UCC and DoC have ordained women since the 19th century. I know of a UCC female pastor who was Catholic but told me she went to the UCC because they listened to her calling. God bless you too.

 

[Tom_Baum]

There is no need to create a dichotomy. The rational human person is quite capable of being concerned with both.

There is no doubt that you ought to be concerned–very, very concerned–with how we view each other.

In fact I am astonished at your dismissal of “how we view each other”.

If even just a few more folks espoused your view that’s all it would take for men like Fred Phelps, Hitler, and even the bully down to street to flourish.

Evil would win with an attitude like that.

It’s wholly and entirely un-Christian.

Since Jesus did not “fight” or stand up the way that you seem to think is the only way, do you consider Jesus un-Christian and that evil won in the way that Jesus stood up to evil?

Lots of people seem to forget that Jesus’s sword is not a man-made sword and that our way of combating wrong is not necessarily God’s way.

You should follow God how you see fit but for you to tell others just how they should follow God is really none of your business.

As far as “Evil would win with an attitude like that.”, don’t you have any faith in God at all?

God’s way of winning may not necessarily look anything to us like winning, isn’t that what some said back in Jesus’s day about the crucifixion?

You sure do seem to think that you know just how everyone should follow God, I would rather be wrong in trying to follow God how I believe God wants me to follow God than right in following God how others think that I should follow God.

 

[Publisher]

Since Jesus did not “fight” or stand up the way that you seem to think is the only way, do you consider Jesus un-Christian and that evil won in the way that Jesus stood up to evil?

Lots of people seem to forget that Jesus’s sword is not a man-made sword and that our way of combating wrong is not necessarily God’s way.

You should follow God how you see fit but for you to tell others just how they should follow God is really none of your business.

As far as “Evil would win with an attitude like that.”, don’t you have any faith in God at all?

God’s way of winning may not necessarily look anything to us like winning, isn’t that what some said back in Jesus’s day about the crucifixion?

You sure do seem to think that you know just how everyone should follow God, I would rather be wrong in trying to follow God how I believe God wants me to follow God than right in following God how others think that I should follow God.

Great post friend,

I do not believe the Way of the Kingdom of God is to war against out brothers and sisters.

The objection for non-resistance among Christians surprises me, and I have been a Friend for right at 40 years.

We a not love our neighbor and wield a sword against him at the same time.

Gods peace, God’a Shalom has at it root not just peace but “wholeness” as well. The time to wage peace is not when a crisis erupts but decades BEFORE the crisis. Peace is not a “one time event” of turning the other cheek, it is building a foundation of peace and trust.

George Fox sId that the People of God live in that virtue if Life that takes away the occasion of war.

Not only do we turn the other cheek but also give away our cloak and carry someone elses burden, Peace sometimes demands a cross. For man to become at peace with God took a cross. There indeed may be suffering. There may be death. But there’s alway the First Day of the week and an empty grave.

It seems that Catholics in particular make much of Jesus single statement “you are Peter…” But when he said “Peter put up your sword” For some reason it has no deeper meaning. Jesuit is also recorded as saying " My Kingdom is not of this world, IF IT WERE MY FOLLOWERS WOULD FIGHT." But we don’t as we live in the Kingdom of God NOW.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Great post friend,

I do not believe the Way of the Kingdom of God is to war against out brothers and sisters.

The objection for non-resistance among Christians surprises me, and I have been a Friend for right at 40 years.

We a not love our neighbor and wield a sword against him at the same time.

Gods peace, God’a Shalom has at it root not just peace but “wholeness” as well. The time to wage peace is not when a crisis erupts but decades BEFORE the crisis. Peace is not a “one time event” of turning the other cheek, it is building a foundation of peace and trust.

George Fox sId that the People of God live in that virtue if Life that takes away the occasion of war.

Not only do we turn the other cheek but also give away our cloak and carry someone elses burden, Peace sometimes demands a cross. For man to become at peace with God took a cross. There indeed may be suffering. There may be death. But there’s alway the First Day of the week and an empty grave.

It seems that Catholics in particular make much of Jesus single statement “you are Peter…” But when he said “Peter put up your sword” For some reason it has no deeper meaning. Jesuit is also recorded as saying " My Kingdom is not of this world, IF IT WERE MY FOLLOWERS WOULD FIGHT." But we don’t as we live in the Kingdom of God NOW.

Well stated!

 

[EvangelCatholic]

It is very important to cling to orthodoxy. But it is not my pride or bias here that is at play, unless you are implying that my submitting to the teachings of scripture and the historic Church is somehow bias and pride. My Christian responsibility is to love the Lord, and my neighbor as myself.

If my parish is required to wait for a rightly called and ordained pastor, that is what we must do, relying on an interim or retired supply pastor for word and sacrament. Further, a shortage of pastors seems a strange reason for promoting female ordination. The Lutherans when they arrived in the Americas certainly did not go in that direction. That said, the LCMS has no pastoral shortage.

Jon

Jon

Sorry for being so snarky

I fully embrace you as a fellow Lutheran and urge frequent inter-communion. The Lutheran World Federation includes synods/ national bodies who also do not ordain females.

 

[JonNC]

Jon

Sorry for being so snarky

I fully embrace you as a fellow Lutheran and urge frequent inter-communion. The Lutheran World Federation includes synods/ national bodies who also do not ordain females.

No worries. We share so much in common that I don’t sweat the little stuff.

Peace, brother

Jon

 

[Sy_Noe]

Since Jesus did not “fight” or stand up the way that you seem to think is the only way, do you consider Jesus un-Christian and that evil won in the way that Jesus stood up to evil?

Lots of people seem to forget that Jesus’s sword is not a man-made sword and that our way of combating wrong is not necessarily God’s way.

You should follow God how you see fit but for you to tell others just how they should follow God is really none of your business.

As far as “Evil would win with an attitude like that.”, don’t you have any faith in God at all?

God’s way of winning may not necessarily look anything to us like winning, isn’t that what some said back in Jesus’s day about the crucifixion?

You sure do seem to think that you know just how everyone should follow God, I would rather be wrong in trying to follow God how I believe God wants me to follow God than right in following God how others think that I should follow God.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Great post friend,

I do not believe the Way of the Kingdom of God is to war against out brothers and sisters.

The objection for non-resistance among Christians surprises me, and I have been a Friend for right at 40 years.

We a not love our neighbor and wield a sword against him at the same time.

Gods peace, God’a Shalom has at it root not just peace but “wholeness” as well. The time to wage peace is not when a crisis erupts but decades BEFORE the crisis. Peace is not a “one time event” of turning the other cheek, it is building a foundation of peace and trust.

George Fox sId that the People of God live in that virtue if Life that takes away the occasion of war.

Not only do we turn the other cheek but also give away our cloak and carry someone elses burden, Peace sometimes demands a cross. For man to become at peace with God took a cross. There indeed may be suffering. There may be death. But there’s alway the First Day of the week and an empty grave.

It seems that Catholics in particular make much of Jesus single statement “you are Peter…” But when he said “Peter put up your sword” For some reason it has no deeper meaning. Jesuit is also recorded as saying " My Kingdom is not of this world, IF IT WERE MY FOLLOWERS WOULD FIGHT." But we don’t as we live in the Kingdom of God NOW.

Good words and I believe food for thought for all who believe, Friend.

 

[PRmerger]

You sure do seem to think that you know just how everyone should follow God, I would rather be wrong in trying to follow God how I believe God wants me to follow God than right in following God how others think that I should follow God.

What an odd thing to say, given these previous posts of yours:

To wit:

As far as, “Now, I am not saying lying is good, because it is not, but I am saying that both are bad, but murdering someone for no reason seems worse than a small lie.”, a lie can be like a snow ball rolling down a hill, something to think about: how many “small lies” do you think have snowballed into something completely out of control since the dawn of humanity?

Lies have started wars, have put innocent people in jail, drove depressed people to suicide, among other things and have done untold damage thru the ages, it is interesting tho that some seem to think that a “little white lie” is so innocuous.

Wrong is wrong, sometimes it seems as if we attempt to put a hierarchy on sins so that we can look at ourself as not as bad of a sinner as some others.

And

One of the things that Pope John Paul II did, was to go around the whole planet and make public confessions of the sins of the Catholic Church.

Jesus never, ever said that His Church would be PERFECT, what He said was that His Church had a mission and that that mission was/is “that the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against It”.

In other words, a tie is absolutely and utterly unacceptable.

God’s Plan is catholic, new heaven/s and a new earth, whatever they may happen to be.

Seems as if quite a few people are more interested in the details than in the inclusivity of God’s Plan.

And

One of the things that Pope John Paul II did, was to go around the whole planet and make public confessions of the sins of the Catholic Church.

Jesus never, ever said that His Church would be PERFECT, what He said was that His Church had a mission and that that mission was/is “that the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against It”.

In other words, a tie is absolutely and utterly unacceptable.

God’s Plan is catholic, new heaven/s and a new earth, whatever they may happen to be.

Seems as if quite a few people are more interested in the details than in the inclusivity of God’s Plan.

And

Sometimes we seem to forget that God became One of us as a human being.

Have you ever heard of Mary Magdelene, I think it was, being referred to as the Apostle to the Apostles since it was her that Jesus SENT to the Apostles.

Apostle simply means one who is sent, at least that is what I think it means.

Therefore, it seems to me, that Mary Magdelene should be considered an Apostle especially if one considers Paul an Apostle since Jesus sent her and Paul, most definitely, considered himself an Apostle.

My namesake referred to the Jews as a “hardheaded and thick necked people”, I think that I have it phrased right, and Christians, of all persuasions, seem to be following in the footsteps of Judaism, at least in regard to this.

Two of, what I consider, the most important things that I have learned in my life, I learned in the 2nd grade and they are: God Is Love and We are all equal in God’s Eyes.

God picks whomever God picks for whatever “job” God picks one for whether we agree with God or not, in other words, God Is God and we ain’t.

It seems that, again, you are reserving for yourself the right to do what you object in others?

[SIGN1]I mean, really, you sure do seem quite confident that you know how everyone should follow God.
[/SIGN1]
That’s fine, Tom. Really. I don’t have a problem with that.

It’s just odd that you wouldn’t allow others to have this same ability.

 

[PRmerger]

It seems that Catholics in particular make much of Jesus single statement “you are Peter…” But when he said “Peter put up your sword” For some reason it has no deeper meaning. Jesuit is also recorded as saying " My Kingdom is not of this world, IF IT WERE MY FOLLOWERS WOULD FIGHT." But we don’t as we live in the Kingdom of God NOW.

While I am certainly no advocate for pugilism, it is important to look at all verses in the Scriptures.

Don’t forget that Jesus also ordered his disciples to buy swords, yes?

“But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag; and the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one.”–Luke 22:36

 

[PRmerger]

Since Jesus did not “fight” or stand up the way that you seem to think is the only way, do you consider Jesus un-Christian and that evil won in the way that Jesus stood up to evil?

Oh, believe me, I am only advocating for what and how Jesus would fight and stand up against men like the Reverend Fred Phelps.

He absolutely would not say, “Well, pray about it. And if the Scriptures tell you something that is contrary to my Church, well, who am I to judge?”

Lots of people seem to forget that Jesus’s sword is not a man-made sword and that our way of combating wrong is not necessarily God’s way.

Well, you can’t combat wrong (and that’s very Catholic of you to say that some people’s opinions and ideas are wrong), unless you have a consistent paradigm.

Saying that people can pray and read the Bible and come to their own conclusions certainly paves the way for people to make erroneous conclusions.

You should follow God how you see fit but for you to tell others just how they should follow God is really none of your business.

This statement above confuses me.

For it appears, again, that you are reserving for yourself the right to tell others just how they should follow God…

and yet you object to me doing it.

As far as “Evil would win with an attitude like that.”, don’t you have any faith in God at all?

I have immense faith in God being able to combat evil. That’s why I am such an unapologetic apologist for His Church.

 

[Porknpie]

This statement above confuses me.

For it appears, again, that you are reserving for yourself the right to tell others just how they should follow God…

and yet you object to me doing it

Yes, this is confusing and inconsistent. The statement as written would result in no evangelization whatsoever, either now or during the apostolic age. The apostles would never have left Jerusalem and none of them would have died as martyrs. Perhaps we would all still be pagans or Muslims. The conversion of Rome would not have occurred. There would be no vatican.

(Then again there would not have been a reformation either.)

You should follow God how you see fit but for you to tell others just how they should follow God is really none of your business.

 

[Novocastrian]

So unless you want to say that the Church erred somewhere in her discernment of the 27 book canon of the NT, you must acknowledge that you believe she was infallible.

Major fallacy here. Even assuming that everything else you say is correct, accepting a canon discerned by the Catholic Church would only entail belief that she is correct in determining the canon, not that she could not possibly have erred. To believe that the Church did not err and to believe that she could not have erred are two different things.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Major fallacy here. Even assuming that everything else you say is correct, accepting a canon discerned by the Catholic Church would only entail belief that she is correct in determining the canon, not that she could not possibly have erred. To believe that the Church did not err and to believe that she could not have erred are two different things.

Exactly!

 

[PRmerger]

Major fallacy here. Even assuming that everything else you say is correct, accepting a canon discerned by the Catholic Church would only entail belief that she is correct in determining the canon, not that she could not possibly have erred. To believe that the Church did not err and to believe that she could not have erred are two different things.

To believe she did not err, since you have no other way to know whether she did err or not, is to believe she did so infallibly.

Unless you want to say some OTHER way you would know she didn’t err?

Otherwise, you are giving your implicit trust and submission to the Church here. And giving a tacit nod to her infallibility.

 

[Novocastrian]

To believe she did not err, since you have no other way to know whether she did err or not, is to believe she did so infallibly.

Unless you want to say some OTHER way you would know she didn’t err?

Otherwise, you are giving your implicit trust and submission to the Church here. And giving a tacit nod to her infallibility.

Not true. I can claim that the Holy Spirit enables me by faith to trust the Church re: the canon. This is not the same as simply believing the Church’s own testimony to herself.

**